So the docker container image-watcher and update-coordinator seems quite incongruous with the rest of the tool. It looks like a “network visibility tool” with the container manager just tacked on as scope creep.
I presume if the container is actioning the updates for you, it also requires docker socket privileges? I imagine that will give a number of people pause about installing it on their homelabs, as “cool looking vibe-coded personal project with docker socket privileges” is a ticking time bomb from a cybersecurity perspective.
If it does require docker socket (and Can’t imagine how the container management would work if it doesn’t) you night have more success getting uptake in users for feedback on the main features if you remove the tacked on container manager and just keep that part for your own personal implementation of the application.
Rather than the Streisand effect which is about attempts to censor information, its probably more accurately described by a term I recently learned about (coined by Lee Vinsel and popularised by Cory Doctorow in his various writings): ‘Criti-hype’.
Doctorow uses it to describe how a lot of online AI criticism is actually feeding the so-called “growth story” that makes AI look attractive to investors (i.e., by tacitly accepting the narrative that AI is actually good enough to ‘take our jobs’, for example) which leads to greater and greater stock valuations of AI companies, and therefore continued AI bubble inflation.
I see the parallels here, not sure if it’s 100% applicable, but thought I’d throw it out there